SGU Episode 335 - Revision history

Xanderox: /* Swindler's List () */ full title

2023-11-01T21:35:11Z

Swindler's List (): full title

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:35, 1 November 2023
Line 472:		Line 472:
	<blockquote>I was listening to the latest podcast, reached the "fact or fiction" segment of the program and was disappointed to hear Jay trot out that old newage-lady-togetherness-myth about women's periods syncing up. It's one of those things people like say, "Betty and I are such good friends, we even have periods at the same time!" It's also bullshit. Socially synchronizing periods do not exist, and because of the varying lengths of duration of the period itself along with time between, cycles that start out apparently synced will un-couple over time. There are only so many days in a general 4-6 week cycle, chances are at some point one of my room mates and I will sort-of-sync for a month or three, but not the whole length of the apartment's lease (And while this myth persists, even it has never had the ovarian fortitude to claim syncing room mates have periods the exact same duration). Too, as cycles un-sync, people will start to count the near-misses as evidence. First it will be on the same day, then only 2 days apart, then 4, etc. "Why, we must still be in sync, even though clearly they're slowly getting further and further apart!" No reputable, repeatable study has ever proved syncing-cycles. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-women-who-live-together-menstruate-together http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2429/does-menstrual-synchrony-really-exist Barbara United States</blockquote>		<blockquote>I was listening to the latest podcast, reached the "fact or fiction" segment of the program and was disappointed to hear Jay trot out that old newage-lady-togetherness-myth about women's periods syncing up. It's one of those things people like say, "Betty and I are such good friends, we even have periods at the same time!" It's also bullshit. Socially synchronizing periods do not exist, and because of the varying lengths of duration of the period itself along with time between, cycles that start out apparently synced will un-couple over time. There are only so many days in a general 4-6 week cycle, chances are at some point one of my room mates and I will sort-of-sync for a month or three, but not the whole length of the apartment's lease (And while this myth persists, even it has never had the ovarian fortitude to claim syncing room mates have periods the exact same duration). Too, as cycles un-sync, people will start to count the near-misses as evidence. First it will be on the same day, then only 2 days apart, then 4, etc. "Why, we must still be in sync, even though clearly they're slowly getting further and further apart!" No reputable, repeatable study has ever proved syncing-cycles. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-women-who-live-together-menstruate-together http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2429/does-menstrual-synchrony-really-exist Barbara United States</blockquote>

	== Swindler's List <small>()</small> ==		{{anchor\|swindlers}}
	~~Online Dating~~		== Swindler's List: Online Dating <small>()</small> ==

	== Science or Fiction <small>()</small> ==		== Science or Fiction <small>()</small> ==

Xanderox: typo

2021-06-29T22:04:39Z

typo

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:04, 29 June 2021
Line 404:		Line 404:
	E: —but with an "X." Makes it sound ''cool''.		E: —but with an "X." Makes it sound ''cool''.

	S: He uploaded the video of a {{w\|coronal mass ejection}} from the sun, and Mercury happened to be in the background. And in [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6X96xI1gLdQ the video], as the — which we'll link to, of course — as the coronal mass ejections were washing across the visual...the field of view, this cluster of lights appears to the right of the bright light that is Mercury in the middle of the field. And then it fades away again as the mass ejection passes by it. So what siniXster thought this was was a large cloaked vessel that was revealed by the energy of the sun, you know, washing past it. What he...he gives us a ~~voiceover~~ for the video. It's actually the Sun Centered Imaging Package and Heliosphere Imager that was taking the pictures, and he says: <blockquote>That is definitely some sort of manufactured object. It's cylindrical on either side and has a shape in the middle. It definitely looks like a ship to me, and very obviously, it's cloaked. There's really absolutely no explanation for that other than it's some sort of ship.</blockquote>		S: He uploaded the video of a {{w\|coronal mass ejection}} from the sun, and Mercury happened to be in the background. And in [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6X96xI1gLdQ the video], as the — which we'll link to, of course — as the coronal mass ejections were washing across the visual...the field of view, this cluster of lights appears to the right of the bright light that is Mercury in the middle of the field. And then it fades away again as the mass ejection passes by it. So what siniXster thought this was was a large cloaked vessel that was revealed by the energy of the sun, you know, washing past it. What he...he gives us a voice-over for the video. It's actually the Sun Centered Imaging Package and Heliosphere Imager that was taking the pictures, and he says: <blockquote>That is definitely some sort of manufactured object. It's cylindrical on either side and has a shape in the middle. It definitely looks like a ship to me, and very obviously, it's cloaked. There's really absolutely no explanation for that other than it's some sort of ship.</blockquote>

	S: There you go.		S: There you go.

Xanderox: /* Hallucinating Color (29:39) */ removed transcribing template (almost 7 years old)

2020-07-06T23:22:32Z

Hallucinating Color (29:39): removed transcribing template (almost 7 years old)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:22, 6 July 2020
Line 464:		Line 464:
	=== Hallucinating Color <small>(29:39)</small>===		=== Hallucinating Color <small>(29:39)</small>===
	* National Geographic: [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/11/111207-hypnosis-hallucinate-color-psychology-brain-science-health/ People Can Hallucinate Color at Will]		* National Geographic: [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/11/111207-hypnosis-hallucinate-color-psychology-brain-science-health/ People Can Hallucinate Color at Will]

	~~{{transcribing~~
	~~\|transcriber = jacquie_o~~
	~~\|date = 2013-10-13~~
	}}

	== Who's That Noisy? <small>()</small>==		== Who's That Noisy? <small>()</small>==

Xanderox: updating outro1 to 301

2020-04-27T01:48:48Z

updating outro1 to 301

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:48, 27 April 2020
Line 489:		Line 489:
	== Announcements <small>()</small> ==		== Announcements <small>()</small> ==

	{{~~Outro1~~}}		{{Outro301}}

	== References ==		== References ==

Jacquie o: /* Hallucinating Color (29:39) */

2013-10-14T07:52:30Z

Hallucinating Color (29:39)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:52, 14 October 2013
Line 467:		Line 467:
	{{transcribing		{{transcribing
	\|transcriber = jacquie_o		\|transcriber = jacquie_o
	\|date = 2013-04-24		\|date = 2013-10-13
	}}		}}

Jacquie o: /* Mercury UFO (22:53) */

2013-10-14T07:50:45Z

Mercury UFO (22:53)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:50, 14 October 2013
Line 452:		Line 452:
	B: Oh, yeah.		B: Oh, yeah.

	S: —the...like ships in formation or something trailing behind the comet, but it was just an artifact of the fact that the camera was tracking the comet, which is moving relative to the background stars. And so the background stars were smearing out and trailing behind the comet. Pure photographic artifact. But it's...you know, this is a common scenario where the UFO enthusiasts ''assume'' that whatever they're looking at is exactly what it is. They take it completely at face value, and they don't consider photographic artifact in their, you know, thinking about it. They...either they just...it's not on their list of things they think about or they just dismiss it out of hand...		S: —the...like ships in formation or something trailing behind the comet, but it was just an artifact of the fact that the camera was tracking the comet, which is moving relative to the background stars. And so the background stars were smearing out and trailing behind the comet. Pure photographic artifact. But it's...you know, this is a common scenario where the UFO enthusiasts ''assume'' that whatever they're looking at is exactly what it is. They take it completely at face value, and they don't consider photographic artifact in their, you know, thinking about it. They...either they just...it's not on their list of things that they think about or they just dismiss it out of hand...

	B: It reminds me of visual perception in general, where, I mean, your eye and your brain — it's not just a camera.		B: It reminds me of visual perception in general, where, I mean, your eye and your brain — it's not just a camera.

Jacquie o: /* Mercury UFO (22:53) */

2013-10-14T07:49:21Z

Mercury UFO (22:53)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:49, 14 October 2013
Line 452:		Line 452:
	B: Oh, yeah.		B: Oh, yeah.

	S: —the... like ships in formation or something trailing behind the comet, but it was just an artifact of the fact that the camera was tracking the comet, which is moving relative to the background stars. And so the background stars were smearing out and trailing behind the comet. Pure photographic artifact. But it's...you know, this is a common scenario where the UFO enthusiasts ''assume'' that whatever they're looking at is exactly what it is. They take it completely at face value, and they don't consider photographic artifact in their, you know, thinking about it. They...either they just...it's not on their list of things they think about or they just dismiss it out of hand...		S: —the...like ships in formation or something trailing behind the comet, but it was just an artifact of the fact that the camera was tracking the comet, which is moving relative to the background stars. And so the background stars were smearing out and trailing behind the comet. Pure photographic artifact. But it's...you know, this is a common scenario where the UFO enthusiasts ''assume'' that whatever they're looking at is exactly what it is. They take it completely at face value, and they don't consider photographic artifact in their, you know, thinking about it. They...either they just...it's not on their list of things they think about or they just dismiss it out of hand...

	B: It reminds me of visual perception in general, where, I mean, your eye and your brain — it's not just a camera.		B: It reminds me of visual perception in general, where, I mean, your eye and your brain — it's not just a camera.

Jacquie o: /* Mercury UFO (22:53) */

2013-10-14T07:49:00Z

Mercury UFO (22:53)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:49, 14 October 2013
Line 452:		Line 452:
	B: Oh, yeah.		B: Oh, yeah.

	S: —the ~~like~~...ships in formation or something trailing behind the comet, but it was just an artifact of the fact that the camera was tracking the comet, which is moving relative to the background stars. And so the background stars were smearing out and trailing behind the comet. Pure photographic artifact. But it's...you know, this is a common scenario where the UFO enthusiasts ''assume'' that whatever they're looking at is exactly what it is. They take it completely at face value, and they don't consider photographic artifact in their, you know, thinking about it. They...either they just...it's not on their list of things they think about or they just dismiss it out of hand...		S: —the... like ships in formation or something trailing behind the comet, but it was just an artifact of the fact that the camera was tracking the comet, which is moving relative to the background stars. And so the background stars were smearing out and trailing behind the comet. Pure photographic artifact. But it's...you know, this is a common scenario where the UFO enthusiasts ''assume'' that whatever they're looking at is exactly what it is. They take it completely at face value, and they don't consider photographic artifact in their, you know, thinking about it. They...either they just...it's not on their list of things they think about or they just dismiss it out of hand...

	B: It reminds me of visual perception in general, where, I mean, your eye and your brain — it's not just a camera.		B: It reminds me of visual perception in general, where, I mean, your eye and your brain — it's not just a camera.

Jacquie o: /* Mercury UFO (22:53) */

2013-10-14T07:46:47Z

Mercury UFO (22:53)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:46, 14 October 2013
Line 436:		Line 436:
	S: As Mercury's moving through the field, you know, its image was imperfectly removed from the background, leaving this ghost image behind on a couple frames.		S: As Mercury's moving through the field, you know, its image was imperfectly removed from the background, leaving this ghost image behind on a couple frames.

	B: Steve, I found another quote from Nathan Rich. This guy's the ground systems engineer for the [http://secchi.nrl.navy.mil/ Sun Earth Connection Coronal and Heliospheric Investigation] — seems like he knows what he's talking about. He said that — kinda like what you said — in essence, the alien image is a visual ~~after effect~~ or ghost artifact of Mercury. But he concludes by saying that that was taken...that was photographed the previous day. So he says it's a byproduct of the way the images are made, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around what he meant by a ghost artifact of Mercury that was photographed the previous day.		B: Steve, I found another quote from Nathan Rich. This guy's the ground systems engineer for the [http://secchi.nrl.navy.mil/ Sun Earth Connection Coronal and Heliospheric Investigation] — seems like he knows what he's talking about. He said that — kinda like what you said — in essence, the alien image is a visual aftereffect or ghost artifact of Mercury. But he concludes by saying that that was taken...that was photographed the previous day. So he says it's a byproduct of the way the images are made, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around what he meant by a ghost artifact of Mercury that was photographed the previous day.

	S: I guess they're using cumulative images, you know, not just one image—		S: I guess they're using cumulative images, you know, not just one image—

Jacquie o: /* Mercury UFO (22:53) */

2013-10-14T07:45:55Z

Mercury UFO (22:53)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:45, 14 October 2013
Line 436:		Line 436:
	S: As Mercury's moving through the field, you know, its image was imperfectly removed from the background, leaving this ghost image behind on a couple frames.		S: As Mercury's moving through the field, you know, its image was imperfectly removed from the background, leaving this ghost image behind on a couple frames.

	B: Steve, I found another quote from Nathan Rich. This guy's the ground systems engineer for the [http://secchi.nrl.navy.mil/ Sun Earth Connection Coronal and Heliospheric Investigation] — seems like he knows what he's talking about. He said that~~...~~kinda like what you said — in essence, the alien image is a visual after effect or ghost artifact of Mercury. But he concludes by saying that that was taken...that was photographed the previous day. So he says it's a byproduct of the way the images are made, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around what he meant by a ghost artifact of Mercury that was photographed the previous day.		B: Steve, I found another quote from Nathan Rich. This guy's the ground systems engineer for the [http://secchi.nrl.navy.mil/ Sun Earth Connection Coronal and Heliospheric Investigation] — seems like he knows what he's talking about. He said that — kinda like what you said — in essence, the alien image is a visual after effect or ghost artifact of Mercury. But he concludes by saying that that was taken...that was photographed the previous day. So he says it's a byproduct of the way the images are made, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around what he meant by a ghost artifact of Mercury that was photographed the previous day.

	S: I guess they're using cumulative images, you know, not just one image—		S: I guess they're using cumulative images, you know, not just one image—